Ok, so deafening song bolt is not a ray spell but requires a range touch attack...so does inspire courage affect it or not???
thanks
Any spell that has an attack roll and can auto-miss on a 1 or threaten a "crit" (whether or not it has any damage to actually multiply) and auto hit on a 20 should be considered weapon-like, so effects that apply to weapon attack/damage should apply.
That's my view, though. The RAW in PF is pretty convoluted and stupid, you're probably out of luck if your DM plays by strict RAW.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
If your GM says it's not because it's not a weapon, then immediately point him to the Firing into melee and cover sections that you don't receive penalties either, since those also both specify weapon.
I'm fine with not getting the bard buffs, since I don't have to have precise shot or take the cover penalties.
That usually ends the argument pretty quick though, and you start getting the bonuses.
The bonus to hit applies. The bonus to damage is more difficult. As I understand it that one does not apply, same as acid splash for example.
|
2 people marked this as a favorite.
|
Any spell that requires an attack roll and does hit point damage benefits from Inspire Courage, according to SKR, a previous Developer.
Sean K Reynolds wrote: TGMaxMaxer wrote: Ok... so since this is something I have to be able to point to from you Sean or the PDT FAQ in order to use it in PFS, as some GMs have been applying the penalty for firing into melee, but not allowing us to get the bonus to damage for things like point blank shot, Inspire courage, etc.
------------------
If a spell or ability requires an attack or ranged attack roll, even if it is not necessarily a ray, it takes the normal ranged attack penalties for firing into melee/cover, and also recieves any bonuses to damage that would apply (only applicable to hit point damage, not spells like enervation etc).
-------------------
Correct?
Yes, correct.
I know about that lol, as you quoted I was part of the discussion.
BUT, in the cases where the GM says it doesn't because it's not a weapon, I will insist that he maintain that consistently throughout the rest of the rules and not make me take the penalty for the other situations since it's not a weapon. Like I said, at that point the GM usually comes around to everything applies both ways.
Personally, I am fine with reading it either way, which was the point of that clarification from SKR.
I show that quote to PFS GMs so often that I had to link to it on my profile for quick and easy access.
So technically, and based on SKR's comment, any spell that requires an attack roll would benefit from it...
So based on that, shocking grasp and any other touch spell would also benefit from it...
TGMaxMaxer wrote: If your GM says it's not because it's not a weapon, then immediately point him to the Firing into melee and cover sections that you don't receive penalties either, since those also both specify weapon. Very interesting...never saw the distinction and specifics about weapons...no matter the decision, it should work the same....
either you get bonus from IC and penalties from shooting, or neither for both....
When my Magus sent out his Quasit Familiar to deliver an Intensified Shocking Grasp and he crit, I rolled 20d6+6.
The GM asked where I was getting the "+6" from.
I told him the +3 from the Bard's song also got multiplied.
He looked at me dumbfounded.
So I've had the link handy ever since.
Nice!!! :-)
+6 on 20d6 might not look so big, but imagine IC + good hope, that could be like +5 per hit....shocking grasp is only one touch, so the impact is lesser.
But for spells like scorching ray, deafening song bolt (DSB), etc. who have many rays/bolts that can have a big impact.
Assuming a bonus of +5, just for DSB, that could represent 15 hp (3 bolts) out of a maximum of 90 hp... that's 16.6% increase (33% if you based in on the average roll)
Well, based on the FAQ that states you may only apply Sneak Attack damage to one ray or bolt, I'd imagine other damage bonuses would only apply to one ray or bolt as well.
interesting...I see your point
However, sneak attack is precision based...
Ic or good hope are not....
If that is the case, a fighter shooting arrows would apply the IC and GH only to the first arrow??? Don't think it would make sense...To be consistent, it has to apply to both the same way
I believe the FAQ you are referring to was applying to precision-based damage only....and that make senses to me, otherwise it would be crazy!!! (a rogue /sorcerer or any such prestige class would be very happy otherwise)
I believe the distinction is that firing off several arrows is different from firing off one spell.
Damage bonuses are applied to each arrow once, just as they are applied to each spell once.
This prevents, as you say, stacking multiple damage bonuses onto multiple-ray spells.
Cuttler wrote: sneak attack is precision based...
Ic or good hope are not....
The FAQ actually doesn't focus on precision-based damage at all:
FAQ wrote: Sneak Attack: Can I add sneak attack damage to simultaneous attacks from a spell?
No. For example, scorching ray fires simultaneous rays at one or more targets, and the extra damage is only added once to one ray, chosen by the caster when the spell is cast.
Spell-based attacks which are not simultaneous, such as multiple attacks per round by a 8th-level druid using flame blade, may apply sneak attack damage to each attack so long as each attack qualifies for sneak attack (the target is denied its Dex bonus or the caster is flanking the target).
Though, since the FAQ does only call out Sneak Attack, I suppose there will be people that continue to apply other damage bonuses to multiple rays until another FAQ is created that states otherwise.
I understand . Indeed, the FAQ does not mention precision-based damage. But then following that reasoning, the FAQ you quoted was specifically for sneak attack and could be argued that it only applies to that (I don't think so though, and I probably would extended to any precision-based damage; but that,s my interpretation)
However...look at that faq:
Ray: Do rays count as weapons for the purpose of spells and effects that affect weapons:
Yes. (See also this FAQ item for a similar question about rays and weapon feats.)
For example, a bard's inspire courage says it affects "weapon damage rolls," which is worded that way so don't try to add the bonus to a spell like fireball. However, rays are treated as weapons, whether they're from spells, a monster ability, a class ability, or some other source, so the inspire courage bonus applies to ray attack rolls and ray damage rolls.
The same rule applies to weapon-like spells such as flame blade, mage's sword, and spiritual weapon--effects that affect weapons work on these spells.
edit: sorry , saw your post after writing mine, but still, hat do you think bout that??
emphasis mine.
The bold part would leave me to believe that since that applies to ray attack rolls (and for exemple, a scorching ray would require 3 attack rolls)and ray damage rolls, then each ray would get the bonus.
In other words, if the damage bonus from IC would apply only once, the bonus to attack should also be applied once...I believe either way, the bonus (to hit and damage) should equally apply either to all rays or only the first ray (or for the sake of this thread, to the first ranged attack)
What do you think??
Cuttler wrote: What do you think?? I think so long as the enemy spellcasters are also given the opportunity to pelt the party with added damage then it's all fair.
Since I GM so much for PFS I'd probably take the more conservative approach and only allow damage bonuses once per spell.
Until the issue was clarified further, at least.
But feel free to rule how you wish.
Agreed...has to work both ways...and that's how we do it!!!
Recent threads in Rules Questions
|
